2023-11-15 - Officially Supported Technologies
Date
Nov 15, 2023
Attendees
@Craig McNally
@Maccabee Levine
@Florian Gleixner
@Zak Burke
@Tod Olson
@Jenn Colt
@Marc Johnson
Discussion items
Time | Item | Who | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
1 min | Scribe | All | @Florian Gleixner does the scribe, @Taras Spashchenko is next, Reminder: Please copy/paste the Zoom chat into the notes. If you miss it, this is saved along with the meeting recording, but having it here has benefits. |
* | Officially Supported Technologies - Upkeep | All |
Previous Notes: Focus on upkeep: How do statuses transition? What is active? Can be up to 4 releases Right now - Poppy, Orchid, Nolana. But Q is also "being developed" Or is it up to GA? Period of time where there is often 2 in dev. We wouldn't want to make Q have to comply with P What milestones should inform statuses? Where in the dev process can we nail things down? Statuses in line with dev processes? Milestones are in the release cycle but toward the end. Don't know until part way through the release cycle what version of RMB, etc Maybe changes need to be valid all the way down to active Changes happen right up to the last moment, and even during support periods Want to be able to make the decisions we can early but that won't be all of them Accepted would be nice but maybe not practical, too linear. Leave for now. Do the kinds of changes matter? Like only for security vs for features Discuss more later If we accept changes all along does the page make sense at all? Can people still use it for planning if it is always a moving target? Maybe for active only take security changes? But basic technologies stay the same Freeze earlier in the cycle? Tell people early on if the version will change, like what Stripes does, RMB process is different? Stripes bumps version number early on then aggregates changes in the cycle to that release. Ahead of cycle determine okapi/stripes/rmb versions? Making decision on stuff we own different from external Have to plan far ahead Lists was Orchid version of stripes but it was going to be in Poppy. If new modules have to have released versions and next version will have a breaking change, they have to refactor So if know going to break stripes do early in the cycle but then can they use snapshot versions? challenge to say they have to use version that doesn't exist yet snapshot versions interferes with reproducible builds Distinguish between internal released tools and external ones? Limit OST to things not internal? Might be easier to talk about external separate from internal? Historical policy around 1st party releases, could be talked about in the future Ended up updating change column to clarify what can/is likely to change in statuses Probably difficult to change release process so this makes sense to distinguish, but doesn't really help TCR problem Might need to relax OST restrictions for 1st party items Do we still need accepted? Might make sense for third party Need to see if actually works practically and then come back to it maybe Upkeep activities Drafting starts at GA for release that is two releases later (R starts at GA of P) Move to accepted before release scope refinement deadline for given release Move to active when development begins on that release, which is around time of feature freeze of the release prior to the given release Archived when it is out of support, tied to GA of future release (2 out?) TC should plan when the release schedule is published Today's Notes:
Open question:
|
NA | Zoom Chat |
| 00:03:24 Jenn Colt: Sorry! |
Action Items